the point i was trying to make is that that this article totally ignores the personal responsibility of the idiot. when something bad happens, everyone say "wh

the point i was trying to make is that that this article totally ignores the personal responsibility of the idiot. when something bad happens, everyone say "why did this happen? what could we do to prevent it?". while it's true that banning fast cars would have prevented this incident, it's wrong to even contemplate that unless it's the last and only option. it's equally true that banning any private cars would also have avoided the incident. just because an idiot uses a tool to do bad things does not make the tool problematic - it means the idiot needs to be smacked. it's supposed to be a free country. before we start impinging on innocent peoples' rights, is there a solution that impinges on the rights of the guilty? in this case: yes. the idiot in question was violating two dozen laws and had a history of many moving violations. this was not a one-time event. the issue is not fast cars. it's why this guy wasn't already in prison and why he owned or could use any car.